WATER FLOWS FASTER THAN JUSTICE "They didn't make a settlement offer ...

| 17 Feb 2015 | 01:35

    FLOWS FASTER THAN JUSTICE

    "They didn't make a settlement offer until the jury was selected. Take it from one who knows the system: It isn't very efficient. Delays are deliberate. If you can postpone payments on claims for damages, the interest can amount to a lot of money."

    -Arthur Schwartz, 51, labor lawyer

    ONE SUNNY Saturday morning in May 1995, Arthur Schwartz left his W. 11th St. residence-a five-story brownstone located between Bleecker and W. 4th Sts.-to take his seven-year-old son to a little league game. He noticed water bubbling up through the street in front of his house. When he approached to investigate, the blacktop collapsed beneath him, and he fell into a deep pit of muddy water.

    He climbed out, calmed his terrified son and determined that a water main had broken. Schwartz immediately called the city to report the break, but it took about two hours for the water to be turned off.

    By then, Schwartz's house was inundated. Ten feet of water filled his basement-which had a home gym with exercise equipment, an office with computers, a laundry room and Arthur's prized collection of 1960s LPs. The water rose until Schwartz's entire first floor-including entryway, living room, kitchen and dining room-was covered with water two-feet-deep, as well.

    Exactly what caused the main break wasn't clear, but Schwartz believes several factors contributed to the extensive damage to his home.

    His neighbor, while replacing his brownstone's water pipes, had tapped in to the main, and contractors had dug a trench from the main to the neighbor's basement.

    "The trench hadn't properly been filled in," says Schwartz. "So, water from the broken main rushed through the trench into my neighbor's basement. When his basement filled, the water pushed through the stone and mortar wall-it was built in 1832-separating our two houses, and filled our basement. And, my neighbor had an oil heater in his basement, so the water that came in to my house was mixed with oil. When they pumped the slimy water out, they had to do it slowly to make sure the walls wouldn't collapse. And, when the water was out, we were left with several feet of slimy mud to remove."

    It took about a week to eliminate the mud, and another six months for the basement and first floor to dry out and be cleared of foul-smelling mildew and mold.

    During that time the Schwartzes crowded into the top floor of their three-story apartment, and made use of the kitchen in Arthur's mother's apartment, which was on the next floor above.

    It wasn't necessary for several tenants on the brownstone's top floor to vacate, but they did suffer the inconvenience of clean up and reconstruction.

    The damages were assessed at $50,000 worth of personal property, including carpeting. Additionally, building repairs cost about $100,000. That didn't include loss of living space or emotional distress.

    "We were well-insured, but our coverage only paid us $120,000. We thought it fair that we collect at least the additional $30,000 of our loss," says Schwartz. "But nobody stepped up to accept responsibility and respond to our claim. Somebody was at fault and accountable. I thought the subcontractor who dug the trench was most at fault-but our tactic was to sue everyone involved-New York City, my neighbor, his plumbing contractor and the subcontractor who dug the trench-and, basically, let a jury assign blame and reward us damages. We asked for $100,000."

    The lawsuit was a waiting game. It took until March 2004-about eight years after filing the suit-before a trial date was set and jury selection was begun. During the intervening years, Schwartz renovated his brownstone-installing an elevator for the convenience of his mother and his top floor tenants. He's been divorced, remarried and his brownstone's value has jumped (from the $750,000 he paid for it in 1991) to about $5 million.

    Finally, on the day his jury was selected, the case settled-with Schwartz receiving $60,000.

    "It covers property loss, but not what we lived through," says Schwartz. "Still, I'm relieved it's over."